Global Products & Pay-to-win

Discussion in 'Spigot Discussion' started by samcries, Oct 18, 2020.


Yes or no?

  1. Yes

  2. No

  1. Would the purchase of certain products be considered pay-to-win if it was given to all players?

    Let's say I'm selling a "global" kit on the server store for $25, and someone bought it. This would give everyone on the server the kit, boosting gameplay for all players.

    Whether it's considered pay-to-win or not, would it make a difference if the product was given to both online and offline players?
  2. Unless the EULA was updated, from the looks of it this would be allowed.

    To cope with the latter sell the time not the product may be the way to go. ;)
  3. Pay to win itself isn't really against the EULA in the first place. The EULA only mentions to not sell anything that Mojang has designed or any in-game currency. Basically saying, you could sell crate keys or commands like /feed, of which aren't created by Mojang, but you can't sell, for example, a diamond, because it was created by Mojang.

    Just because the EULA allows the selling of products not made by Mojang doesn't mean it's not pay-to-win. It's obvious that /feed is a pay-to-win command even though it's not against the EULA.

    Let me clarify the question. So whether it's allowed or not, would it be qualified as being pay-to-win?
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. Interesting indeed, it seems like as you mentioned it may be permit able HOWEVER I do have a personal thought to add apart from that.

    As I said above it may be BETTER in sense of everyone if you done something like this...

    "/feed enabled for 15 minutes for $2.50" INSTEAD of "/feed enabled $25 and everyone gets it who was on at the time of purchase"

    This is because now you would be selling time to said perk and therefore there little if any room for unfairness. Easier to prove a player did not have it (if they are not in on time and/or didn't used the perks in time they don't get it, however access was "open" for everyone whole time "rented"). Plus you can capitalize this more easily to cover regular costs.
    • Creative Creative x 1
  5. For me, p2w is just user perspectives, if they're not happy with the item they get and other players can get the same item by paying (assuming the item can acquire by either paying or playing), then they will call it p2w.

    About the EULA, Mojang themself don't give a single shit. It is just there to spook server owner, they already state that stuff that considers "donation" for the server then it's allowed.

    Yes, Mojang used to ban some big network over p2w, but that's wayyyy long ago (2014??).
  6. So the EULA changed earlier this year I think so I am not 100% sure, I am actually having a hard time finding it but from what I recall I think anything giving items was still not allowed, but things like 2x global/server boost for an hour or of that nature were... if anyone knows of the updated link I'd appreciate it being posted here.

    NOTE: we aren't lawyers so don't just accept all of our advice, make sure to analyze and evaluate yourself
  7. "Pay to win" is defined as, obtaining an advantage over other(s) as a result of an individual purchasing "stuff" with legal, valid, and legitimate currency. Things which are not cosmetic or superficial. Several links below for the definitions.

    An example would be purchasing currency which boosts your ability in "actual game-play".

    You're merely exchanging legitimate real-life currency, in return for "stuff" (which if used correctly) will, and or; can give you a significant boost in front of others, essentially saving you heck loads of time.

    Basically, time-savers, and actual-items.

    You're not necessarily paying to win the game, you're just paying to save time, or gain an advantage.

    Just be careful making a pay-to-win server, not because of the EULA; but you might get a lot of backlash from the community.
    #7 Nerm, Oct 18, 2020
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2020
  8. That's not exactly what they say. From the Commercial Usage guidelines:
    So in fact, /feed for example is a gameplay advantage that you should not sell, because it removes or reduces the need to find food, which "can cause one player ... to perform better."
    Your original question:
    Another quote from the guidelines, from the same "you may" list:
    This seems to say that if you do give the whole server the rewards, that's fine. It doesn't seem to make any statements about online/offline players though.
  9. That's indeed false.

    Just read the commercial guidelines. You're not allowed to offer competitive advantages.

    To sum it up you can do:
    • Cosmetic-only rewards (no capes!)
    • Selling virtual currency with no real-world value, non-global (not used by multiple networks), not named MineCoins, the items sold with this currency must follow the commercial guidelines!
    • Provide product placement, in-game advertising, if they're not degrading gameplay.
    • Provide items (eg: kits, etc) as long as they don't negatively impact other players, and it doesn't give a competitive advantage. (This was recently changed and opens the gate to selling a lot of stuff)

    Now, in your case, it would be allowed, but I wouldn't advise it for gameplay reasons. You'll flood your economy with too many items and that will destroy it. I'd suggest just designing a non-competitive game and sell items or providing a virtual currency (eg: PixelCoins that are worth 0.01$ each. Players can transact in-game, and purchase store items with the coins.) Allows poor players to trade for money, and increases revenue overall without breaking eula.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  10. MicheleP

    MicheleP Previously MicPlayzRL

    It is against the EULA to give players the ability to BUY items that DO give a competitive advantage; i.e an OP kit that only the players that but it can get.

    Do's and Dont's:


    Provide items (kits, etc) as long as they don't give a competitive advantage.


    Sell items that provide competitive advantages.
  11. I'm not too concerned about the rules, I don't think selling a global booster would be against the EULA, and as you said, Mojang doesn't really do anything about it. Either way, if it's against or not against the EULA, which I don't think it is, then if the product is given to everyone, then would it be considered as pay-to-win?
    I understand what pay-to-win is, but would these standards apply to global boosters?
    It seems like a loophole in the system, considering it's asking for pure donations and trying to achieve a goal, and not simply purchasing the booster.
    Interesting. Would you think ManaCube is a pay-to-win server, considering the fact that you can trade in-game money to redeem a gift card in the store?
  12. If you mean Global Booster as in everyone within a "global instance" obtains an advantage; rather than 1 specific person than the standards are different.

    A global booster in my opinion holds "a more ethical approach", but don't let my ethics discourage your behavior.

    A benefit for all, vs a benefit for one. So I personally don't think a global booster would be considered "pay to win".
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Say the "booster" was an item. Would it change your opinion if the item was only given to the current players online or if it were to be given to everyone including offline players?
  14. You can do global boosters (must be to all players ofc like you asked about). To what extent, I don't recall. Global Booster isnt pay to win. more like Pay for many. or whatever. lol

    Now im not sure on non cosmetic kits. -shrugs-

    you actually CAN ask them via email. just dont bring up more than literally the idea.
    iirc there was a email for questions and such. but eh
  15. So what's your question then? Is it whether your players would consider it pay to win or?
  16. Offline players are players whom haven't paid for the actual game, to my knowledge; the End User License Agreement is agreed upon account creation. They don't have an account, they're using an illegal version of Minecraft.

    I personally don't enjoy the allowance of cracked, or offline players as it brings in too many unnecessary and preventable problems. One person gets banned, they're right back on doing the thing they were just banned for.

    The same could be said alternate accounts, but that's a more of a hassle.

    Regardless of that jargon, I personally believe you shouldn't allow offline players as it just brings in many problems. But, my statements are not stopping you.

    The question I believe you're asking is; "If someone activates a booster, and this only applies to players whom have successfully authenticated with Minecraft (Premium) does this change the ethics?" In my opinion you're disqualifying a category of players because they're playing on an account which isn't authenticated with Minecraft.

    My first question would be why disqualify them, but allow them to play? What happens if one of the offline players decide or choose to purchase one for themselves? Does that booster apply to them?

    Or do you mean offline players as in players whom are not logged in at the given moment of the booster? If that's what you mean; then that's is the players choice, they chose to not be on for another reason. If they want to be on; they could choose to be on.
  17. Yes exactly
  18. I mean people who arent logged on lmao
  19. Then yea, those players chose not to be present at the time of a booster being applied. Regardless of whether or not they had knowledge of their ever being one.
  20. So based on the poll it seems like most people don't regard global products to be qualified as pay-to-win. I'm asking because I was wondering if it was okay to create a booster that gives players 2x extra XP and coins when they mine blocks, farm crops, fight mobs, etc. Originally I was going to offer the booster per player and it would be bought using in-game currency, but I thought maybe I could sell a global booster on the store.

    Would my intentions change any perspectives or would the answers stay the same?